Fear&Loss - Industrial Karoo group exhibition

This is the dead land
This is cactus land
Here the stone images
Are raised, here they receive
The supplication of a dead man’s hand
Under the twinkle of a fading star.

Is it like this
In death’s other kingdom
Waking alone
At the hour when we are
Trembling with tenderness
Lips that would kiss
Form prayers to broken stone.

- From The Hollow Men, T.S. Eliot 1925

A word by the curator

The installation Fear&Loss speaks of the possible environmental damage should the Dutch oil giant Shell be granted an exploration license to drill for shale gas in the Groot Karoo – the place of my home, community and livelihood.  

Fracking - or hydraulic fracturing - involves pumping toxic chemicals and fluids under high pressure five km deep into the earth’s core. This causes the seams in the layers of sediment to break apart for gas and oil extraction. Large volumes of water are needed for this and these fluids and chemicals cannot be recycled and remain in the earth, causing the fear of contamination of the underground water supply. In the Karoo, this is drawn from its reservoir of interconnected aquifers through the use of boreholes and springs (http://www.greenpeace.
org). 

My work has evolved out of my own deep concern and passion for this widely-ignored part of our country. Despite larger questions that arise, the work is also intensely personal since it addresses a situation that will impact dramatically on me, my family, and community. As such, my intention is that the work may raise awareness in its creation of a specific and intimate
installation space. 

Fear and Loss focuses on the impact of global capitalism and consumerism on individuals and small communities. Eliot’s poem, The Waste Land (1922) reveals the emotional and physical scars and damage left by World War I and expresses the unspoken wish that this type of tragedy will not be repeated. But Fear&Loss represents the probability that man-made disasters will. Creative works, such as the poem The Waste Land, or the visual art installation Fear&Loss, remain tools for communication, to reach out beyond our immediate realm of understanding and lay bare our hope for humanity.

- Katie Barnard du Toit 

 

Earthlife Africa Press Release: The climate circus is in town!

An international conference concerned with clean air, the International Union of Air Pollution Prevention Association’s (IUAPPA) “Clean Air Congress” in Cape Town at the end of September, is being sponsored by some of South Africa’s biggest air polluters.

Sasol (which is the emitter of the largest point source of climate changing greenhouse changing gases in the world); Eskom (who are currently requesting an exemption from compliance with South Africa’s National Air Quality Act and supporting plans to build yet a third mega-coal fired power station, notwithstanding radioactive emissions from its Koeberg nuclear power plant); Engen (with a long history of harm to residents of South Durban); Shell (linked to human rights and environmental violations in the Niger delta, and one of many who wish to carry out polluting hydraulic fracturing in our country) and Exarro, our 2nd largest coal mining company. We find it surprising that no mention is made of the fatally toxic and radioactive air pollution planned by the smelter plants of the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) at Pelindaba.

“The Clean Air Congress is shown for what it is – an opportunity for South Africa’s Climate Clowns to sponsor a green-washing circus” said Muna Lakhani of Earthlife Africa Cape Town. “The irony is compounded by the fact that the Mayor of Cape Town and the MEC for the Western Cape (who are featured speakers at the Congress) support this process.”

Over 60 civil society organisations find this Congress problematic. An indication of the potential for “green-wash” can be found in the draft programme (fourth revision), which has as a heading “Health Impacts and Perceptions.”

“The health impacts of air pollution are not ‘perceptions’, they are a fact!” commented Des D’sa of the South Durban Community Environmental Alliance (SDCEA). “Our children and other residents suffer from high rates of upper respiratory tract problems due to poor air quality in South Durban.” 

They are calling for companies to take responsibility for their actions, and for government to hold them accountable, in a transparent manner.

Roegshanda Pascoe, of the Manenberg development co-ordinating structure, says “Our people are hurting with the high and rising electricity prices, and with nuclear and more coal power stations, prices will just keep on escalating. Since the first price increases, we have seen an increase in domestic violence linked to unaffordability of electricity, and other social impacts. It is time government takes the steps necessary to change our vision to one of energy security for all, in a safe and sustainable way.”

Community members feel that government must take their lead from our Constitution, and fully engage civil society in our supposed “participative democracy” in fully informed and thorough consultation before taking decisions on behalf of communities, especially the poor.

The media is encouraged to cover this congress, and ask the questions that civil society are asking, viz:

1. Why is a parastatal even asking for an exemption from our National Air Quality Act, when a substantial body of evidence confirms harm from coal fired power stations?
2. Why is fracking even being considered, when it is at least as problematic as coal, certainly from a climate change perspective? Has nothing been learnt from water, land and air pollution impacts elsewhere in the world, accompanied by social devastation?
3. Why is government complicit in these kinds of “greenwashing” exercises, yet finds it impossible to hold companies to account for the known harm that they do?
4. What is the point of IUAPPA convening such a congress under these auspices, when even they (IUAPPA) confirm: “Air pollution causes over 800,000 deaths and tens of millions of respiratory and other illnesses each year. It damages ecosystems and affects quality of life, reduces economic activity and reinforces the cycle of poverty in many areas of the world.”

Civil society that is concerned with plans for more climate change-inducing coal fired power stations that is now on the cards in South Africa, dangerous and expensive nuclear power, polluting and socially and environmentally devastating hydraulic fracturing (fracking), problematic coal mines and the high price of electricity, have come together to protest this gathering of our polluters and government representatives.

The protest is planned for Sunday the 29th of September between 2pm and 4pm opposite the Cape Town International Convention Centre. Cape Town Mayor, Councillor Patricia de Lille, and representatives from the named polluting companies have been invited to receive a memorandum outlining the concerns of civil society that believe the polluter-pays-principle should be strictly enforced. This initiative has thus far received the support of more than 80 organisations.

Come and join us!!

This initiative is supported by:

Earthlife Africa Cape Town; CAPTRUST; Community Consent Movement; Manenberg Dev Co-ord Structure; Southern Cape Land Committee, Groundwork, South Durban Community Environmental Alliance,  Cochoqua Tribal House (Khoi San), Coalition for Environmental Justice, Million Climate Jobs Campaign, The South African United National Anti-nuclear Mobilisation Initiative (TSUNAMI) comprising over 60 organisations; Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) comprising numerous community-based organisations, professionals and NGOs.

Shell and the economics of truth

This Press Release was issued by the TREASURE KAROO ACTION GROUP
http://hwb.co.za/media-article.php?id=423
1 June 2011

---

Shell and the economics of truth

Wednesday, 1 June 2011, Cape Town: The ongoing and much-welcomed debate on the safety and sensibility of using hydraulic fracturing to retrieve shale gas in the Karoo has been overshadowed by a systematic corporate strategy of being economical with the truth.

Despite the South African Cabinet's declaration of a moratorium on all applications for licences to conduct hydraulic fracturing in the exploration of shale gas reserves in the Karoo, major oil and gas corporations continue to lobby government and the population that the method—commonly referred to as "fracking"—is safe and viable.

Shell South Africa Energy Limited, a division of Royal-Dutch Shell, immediately after the moratorium announcement, ran full-page advertisements in the national weeklies and distributed flyers at Shell service stations making a number of claims about fracturing. These adverts are currently under investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority for being misleading and untruthful.

In a live debate with Jonathan Deal, Chairman of Treasure the Karoo Action Committee (TKAG) held at the UCT's Gordon Business School, the Chairman and Vice President of Shell South Africa Energy Limited, Bonang Mohale, stated that there has never been "a single case of groundwater contamination resulting from fracturing”

"In our 60 years we have never found these fractures going up to the surface. It has just never happened in 800,000 wells. What is likely that can go wrong is, again, in the construction of the well itself: these things do collapse. In the 800,000 wells we have done there is not one single bit of evidence that a well owned, managed and drilled by Shell has ever collapsed."

This is clearly not the truth. Between 19 January 2011 and 5 March 2011, a subsidiary of Shell, East Resources Management LLC (ERM), a hydraulic drilling contractor (acquired by Shell in May 2010) and operating in the Marcellus Shale area, USA, notched up six environmental violations in Marcellus. One of these is described in the report as

"Unpermitted discharge of residual waste. Pollutional substances at well site impacted groundwater. Seep expressed itself in sed [imentary] basin. Elevated chloride, barium, strontium and sodium concentrations in seep."

What Mohale also does not reveal is that the collapsing of the well wall is not the only source of contamination of aquifers and surface water sources. What is also likely that can "go wrong" is what happened with the five other serious violations. Again, the report states that Shell's offences were:

"Discharge of pollutional material to waters of the [C]ommonwealth. "

"Failure to properly store, transport process or dispose of a residual waste."

“Pit and tanks not constructed with sufficient capacity to contain pollutional substances.”

“Drilling within 100ft (30m) of surface water or wetland without variance. Constructing a site without permission.”

“Discharge of pollutional material into water of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. What happened: unpermitted discharge to south branch Thornbottom Creek."

In another incident in Australia, a fracking well drilled by Arrow Energy was out of control for more than 24 hours following a blowout on two weeks ago. Shell Energy Holdings Australia Ltd and PetroChina International Investment Company Ltd bought-out Arrow for $3.1-billion in 50-50 joint venture deal in March last year. The blowout spilled roughly 1 000 cubic metres of methane gas per hour into the air.

Fingers cannot be pointed at ERM or Arrow. Shell takes full responsibility. Mohale is on record as saying, when discussing, the operational behaviour of Shell, including its subsidiaries and subcontractors, that "the responsibility lies with Shell.”

"If we subcontract it [the drilling] the responsibility lies with Shell. Subcontractors are our partners and if something goes wrong we are ultimately held accountable."

One of the statements on a Shell flyer distributed at Shell service stations after the Cabinet moratorium, states:

"Shell commits to lead in the setting of global best practices and operational standards."

Six serious violations of environmental law in the space of 45 days in the United States does not speak to "global best practices and operational standards". Nor does the fracking-well blowout in Australia.

Shell's website makes the following claim about the chemicals used in fracking:

The fluids injected into the rock consist of more than 99% water and sand, with a small amount of additives similar to those found in household products."

( http://bit.ly/mU0HSS)

And the Shell advert distributed at Shell service stations after cabinet moratorium says:

"We also commit to disclosing fracturing fluids at each drilling location."

Yet, Shell will not reveal exactly what those chemicals are when asked in a public debate. And what Mohale didn't say was that Shell, along with BP and Total refused to participate in the American Petroleum Institute's (API) Subcommittee (13) on "Drilling, Completion, and Fracturing Fluids". Nor did he reveal that Shell Oil Company (USA) provided US Senate lawmakers "with language to include in a pending climate change bill that essentially would block federal oversight of hydraulic fracturing."

Reports from the USA state that if this language is "incorporated into the climate change law, it would keep the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from imposing regulations on fracturing... [and] recommends that states adopt standards for disclosing the contents of hydraulic fracturing chemicals... but maintain 'the confidentiality of trade secret information' in the fluids".

This statement seems to pre-empt a stand not yet taken by Shell, Bundu, Falcon and SASOL on matters relating to hydraulic fracturing chemicals. Even its Vice President of new-business development at Shell Exploration and Production, Olivier Lazare, who has urged his company to disclose hydraulic fracturing chemicals has been ignored.

Shell's South African website makes the following claim:

"It [natural gas] burns more cleanly than any other fossil fuel, emitting 50-70% less carbon dioxide (CO2) than coal in electricity generation." ( http://www.shell.com/home/content/zaf/aboutshell/shell_businesses/e_and_p/karoo/natural_gas.html or: http://bit.ly/klt7ax)

This is not factually correct. Recent studies from Cornell University—Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations by Robert W. Howarth, Renee Santoro and Anthony Ingraffea—have shown that natural gas, which is mostly methane—a much more potent greenhouse gas, "with 105 times more warming impact, pound for pound, than carbon dioxide (CO2)".

Howarth has estimated that as much as 8% of the methane in shale gas leaks into the air during the lifetime of a hydraulic shale gas well—"up to twice what escapes from conventional gas production".

"The take-home message of our study is that if you do an integration of 20 years following the development of the gas, shale gas is worse than conventional gas and is, in fact, worse than coal and worse than oil," Howarth said. "We are not advocating for more coal or oil, but rather to move to a truly green, renewable future as quickly as possible. We need to look at the true environmental consequences of shale gas."

Mohale and Graham Tiley General Manager for new ventures and international exploration at Shell are on record stating:

"Fracking is safe and poses no risk to the environment.”

This is as credible a statement as "smoking does not cause cancer". The violations of environmental regulations by Shell, the self-proclaimed market leader in hydraulic fracturing, are a matter of fact. These violations evidence that no reasonable person can possibly argue that hydraulic fracturing is safe and poses no risk to the environment.

Shell has been economical with the truth. South Africa has been misled. Our Ministers, their departments, and our regulators have been misled. Have they also been misled by the other fracking companies that maintain lower public profiles? If the offences in the US and Australia had not come to light, was our government is at risk of making fracking related decisions based on false information?

If South Africans are going to resolve the controversy surrounding fracking, we need facts, we need truthfulness, we need openess and we need transparency—things that have purposefully not been given to us.

Anti-fracking Activists call for a National Boycott of Shell

An excerpt from the press release issued by Earthlife Africa Cape Town:

Earthlife Africa is calling for a nationwide boycott of all Shell service stations and all Shell products, from Tuesday 17th May – which coincides with Royal Dutch Shell’s AGM in the Netherlands, and is also, co-incidentally, the United Nation’s World Information Society Day - to show their displeasure at plans to “frack” large parts of our country.

“We ask people to go to their nearest Shell garage, NOT fill up, but ask to speak to the manager and say that they have nothing against the manager personally, but the company is carrying out plans that have potentially horrendous impacts on people and especially scarce water in our country,” said Andreas Spath, Earthlife’s
Anti-fracking co-ordinator.

Shell, the South African government and the natural gas industry portray shale gas as a climate-friendly, low-carbon energy source. In reality, however, preliminary studies have shown that if the entire carbon footprint, including methane (a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2) escaping from fracking wells in substantial quantities, is taken into account, natural gas from this source contributes to climate change in a magnitude similar to oil and coal.

“Shell’s record in Africa should be cause for alarm”, said the Reverend Barry Wuganaale, of the Ogoni Solidarity Forum. “Not only for widespread and continuing environmental harm, but they have also acknowledged being complicit in the murder of activists opposing them in Nigeria. They cannot be trusted.”

Read the full press release here: http://www.earthlife.org.za/?p=1591



VALLEY OF DELINQUENCY, charcoal and pastel on paper.
Duncan Stewart
[See more of his work]

ENERGY lecture at the Book Lounge